AniInterview Sorry, this movie sucks

Stometer Save your money for something good and enjoyable

CommentsXp Best movie ever!

Stoutor It's not great by any means, but it's a pretty good movie that didn't leave me filled with regret for investing time in it.

Sky Diver Yes, confusing, but so odd that it haunted me to the point that I had to watch it again. There are many things that dont make a lick of sense in this movie. The plot for one thing. (What was the plot again?) A crazy man running full speed around Georgia simply because he's crazy? Any number of movies could be made from that idea, and like this one, few would make any sense. And what about the period that this movie was supposed to represent? It looked like a cross between the 1950s and 1980s. Some cars, and most houses looked like the 50s, while other cars and microwave towers were obviously the late 70s when the movie was made. And what about Brad Dourif, who's acting ability is about average and a joy to watch, except in this moves he only had one facial expression throughout? Teeth gritted, lower jaw out, and a nervousness that makes Barney Fife look calm. Yes, fun to watch, but I'm still trying to figure out why?

Jon Hartz Too many anachronisms to stomach, it looks like the 1970's instead of the years right after WWII. They did not spend enough money on production to make it believable. I mean, Afros, large sunglasses, modern skyscrapers, modern clothes? Really? The rented steam train does not come close to making up for everything else. That, and the bad acting did it for me. I have never read the book and I wonder if the screenplay is true to it: Flannery O'Connor is an excellent author, I can't believe she wrote it like this. That, and the anti-Christian subtext is very disturbing. My bride and I sat through about thirty minutes before we threw in the towel.

tvspace This is a very strange film -- disturbing and dark, but shot in an almost unaesthetic made-for-TV movie kind of way. Some of the musical choices, in particular, stand out as dated and goofy -- moments where things seem strange, disjointed and upsetting but are set to rollicking circus music (and not in an ironic way), as if the whole thing is in good fun.Because I haven't read the source material by Flannery O'Connor I'm unable to pass any judgment on how fully Huston captured the original characters. What I will say, is that as a child of the South in the 70's, there is a wistful documentary-quality to seeing the kind of ragged simplicity and charmingly trashy culture that we all grew up with back then. By comparison I think we have all become extremely self-conscious about a kind of forced cosmopolitanism by now (small batch mustard and all that jazz; beer connoisseurs; locally-sourced beef).As some other commenters noted, the casual use of the n-word by so many people seems unrealistic and shocking, in that amongst my middle class small-town family and acquaintances, it would never have been used, not out of political correctness per se, but because its use, back then, would have identified you as white trash (ironically enough). But, without meaning to sound disparaging, this story is in some sense about "white trash" so maybe in fact that is how people on the bottom of the social ladder spoke back then. (It's notable that the word isn't used with any meanness, but just out of a century of habit).This is not, by far, a great movie. But there is some really tremendous acting. Besides the obvious kudos for Brad Dourif, I found the most extraordinary performance to be that given by Amy Wright as Sabbath Lily. Erotic and sweetly screwed up, she provides the most human spark in a movie that is otherwise about some incredibly malignant and lost characters.For me as a fan of 1970's movies, this is a must-see, but I would advise going in that the film does seem extremely dated at times. Despite that it's interesting and unpredictable and full of dark psychological twists and turns that remind you how much more meaningful drama can be than the latest superhero movie at the cineplex.

gavin6942 A Southerner (Brad Dourif) -- young, poor, ambitious but uneducated -- determines to become something in the world. He decides that the best way to do that is to become a preacher and start up his own church.This film is brilliant for its examination of religion and for its casting. On the former point, some aspects are clearly exaggerated. The world is full of crazy preachers, but probably not so many in one town that they are stumbling over each other. Is the film against religion? No. On the surface, yes, but it is really against hypocrisy.And the casting... Harry Dean Stanton and Ned Beatty are great, but Brad Dourif runs the show, and it is a shame his name is not more widely known outside of film fanatic circles...